civic VS 5.0 who would win
Thread Starter
Registered!!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Rep Power: 0 
civic VS 5.0 who would win
ok a freind of mine at work drives an 89 mustang gt 5.0 with flowmaster exuast and he wants to race me i have i/h/e/p and heavy a$$ 17" who do you think would win.
Thread Starter
Registered!!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Rep Power: 0 hahahahahah i already raced it i just wanted to see what you guys woud say, and i yeah beat it by about three car lengths both times we raced. the first time we did it from a dig and umm yeah i won and the second time on our way back from a 30 roll i was in second yeah i won again. i just walked on him what you guys dont think of is 225 to the crank rwd about 165 to the wheels and about 4,000 lbs compared to 2,500lbs so what were you saying about the stang wining hahahahahaha
hmmm. d17 can really beat a 5.0??? If its like that. we can take any car from rsx-s 200hp, gt-s 180hp, civic si / rsx - 160..............??????
Last edited by STL01Civic; Oct 30, 2004 at 01:25 AM.
Registered!!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton
Rep Power: 0 225 to the crank, 165 to the wheels?? 30% drivetrain loss? Thats quite a bit.
Also, for the weight:
LX 5.0L coupe
Curb Weight - Automatic (lb.) No data
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.) 3045
Unless its the GT convertible, which was 3333lbs. in 5spd manual trim.
Power to weight ratios, though not necessarily all-telling have him at 0.054 (using your really very low whp estime) vs your Civic, with say 110hp to the wheels with 0.044 power to weight ratio.
So, I think its safe to say that you're completely delusional.
Also, for the weight:
LX 5.0L coupe
Curb Weight - Automatic (lb.) No data
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.) 3045
Unless its the GT convertible, which was 3333lbs. in 5spd manual trim.
Power to weight ratios, though not necessarily all-telling have him at 0.054 (using your really very low whp estime) vs your Civic, with say 110hp to the wheels with 0.044 power to weight ratio.
So, I think its safe to say that you're completely delusional.
Thread Starter
Registered!!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: Texas
Rep Power: 0 you guys are haters i remember about 2 months ago this other guy was talking about beating a 5.0 and every one was ******* on him for braging because the car so old and blah blah blah. so i thought i would here yuo guys doudt me then tell you that i won. just to prove my point that no matter hat you guys hate on people it goes from one extreme to the other. all because yuo have already sasdi i would loose so after i tell you that i win yuo cant admit that i might be right i was not even goign to post this kill just like i never post my kills on her because of what ever buddy says. like i beat a chevy v6 extreme by about 4 carlengths from a roll and on etime i herd you guys saying that those cars are fast and that there is no way a civic can beat one so i did not even waste my time. then i beat a nova on the highway but did not post because i knew i would get flamed for it. the point is not that i did race and beat it twice i could see getting lucky ounce but twice with the same results hmmm. and have you guys ever tryed to race one maybe if you tryed then you would see i am not so far out there. and as for hp lost look at teh new issue of 5.0 and fast fords.the average hp lost from the crank to the wheels is about 60 hp. so with all thath said dont be mad that i actually proved you guys wrong by beating a "domestic"
http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forum...5&page=4&pp=15
in that thread, you'll see a couple 5.0's that run mid 14's with minimal mods
I don't know why so many people underrate mustangs ... I think they're the BEST bang for the buck cars out there ... way better than evos, srt4's, etc ... where's blainestang when u need him
in that thread, you'll see a couple 5.0's that run mid 14's with minimal mods
I don't know why so many people underrate mustangs ... I think they're the BEST bang for the buck cars out there ... way better than evos, srt4's, etc ... where's blainestang when u need him
Originally Posted by aznboysrfr
^^ whp is very different than base hp/crank hp ... it's 260 to the crank and probably what you said above for whp
Registered!!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton
Rep Power: 0 There is obvious power loss from crank to wheels, just look at what a car like a WRX dynos with all the rotational inertia its AWD system eats up.
But, that still doesn't account for the quarter mile times that people have found for various 5.0L Stangs that are somewhere in the 14s, the guy has an exhaust too, which is good I'd say for at least a few hp in an engine that big, I mean, wasn't one of the reasons that the 4.9 engine in that car put out so little hp because it had something like 4 factory installed catalytic converters?
Can someone who is more farmiliar w. domestics verify this?
But, that still doesn't account for the quarter mile times that people have found for various 5.0L Stangs that are somewhere in the 14s, the guy has an exhaust too, which is good I'd say for at least a few hp in an engine that big, I mean, wasn't one of the reasons that the 4.9 engine in that car put out so little hp because it had something like 4 factory installed catalytic converters?
Can someone who is more farmiliar w. domestics verify this?
